Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

HAS LABOUR CAUGHT UP WITH THE SNP IN SCOTTISH GENERAL ELECTION POLLING? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,687
edited March 2023 in General
imageHAS LABOUR CAUGHT UP WITH THE SNP IN SCOTTISH GENERAL ELECTION POLLING? – politicalbetting.com

It’s very rare indeed for any polling company to admit to making an error that has skewed a published poll. So rare indeed that we might speculate that whenever a polling company itself discovered an error in the past, the company concerned kept quiet and hoped that no-one else had noticed other than to assume that any unusually rogue result was down to sampling error or the like. Better to keep quiet than to suffer reputational damage by admitting an error, so the polling company might reason.

Read the full story here

«13456713

Comments

  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,589
    Thanks for this, WP!
  • Options
    Labour large majority a good bet if they do well in Scotland
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,002

    Labour large majority a good bet if they do well in Scotland

    Labour could "double win" in Scotland: if they are on level pegging with the SNP at the General Election, one would expect them to benefit from anti-SNP tactical voting (as the LibDems in particular also do).

    Taking this R&W poll, and assuming it manifests itself as the SNP dropping 10% in 2024 in every constituency, with that 10% lumped onto whoever is in second place.

    You know what happens?

    SNPageddon.

    Of the 57 seats in Scotland, the SNP would win only 9 (!) The Labour Party ends up on 32, with the Conservatives managing 10 and LDs 6.

    Now, I suspect it won't be quite so severe. But even a situation where the SNP loses 5 points and the second placed party picks them up, then you still see the Labour Party gaining 15 or so seats.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited March 2023
    The problem is, if R&W have screwed up in one aspect of their methodology, there is every reason to doubt the entire piece of work. What other mistakes have they made down the years?

    Indeed, if one’s digs deeply into who and what R&W actually is, one becomes deeply concerned. For example, late last year R&W published a poll showing a majority for Scottish independence. Needless to say, the British Nationalist community were not happy bunnies. Here is one of them dissing the pollster:

    Is that the poll done with actuarial precision by the top notch firm,Redfield&Wilton Strategies…2employees,Director Bruno Augusto Kormann Rodrigues,no office ,assets of £846 &exempt from audit.Those polling experts??Nats.You’re having a laugh,surely?

    https://twitter.com/marthasupermum/status/1598092466607263746?s=46

    She’s got a point!

    Who is paying for this shadowy organisation and its work? No client name is published. A characteristic it shares with other pollsters: Omnisis, Techne, Deltapoll, Savanta and BMG who have all recently published polls with no client name provided. Fundamentally dodgy IMHO.

    Polls published by political parties are (quite rightly) routinely excluded from tables of poll results. I cannot recall a Swedish opinion poll ever being published without the name of the client clearly stated in reporting. So why do we routinely accept the findings of these polls with mystery funding? It could be the Russian or Chinese state behind them. Or the British state. Or Tufton Street. It could be somebody with no qualifications in the required mathematical and statistical skills (Bruno Augusto Kormann Rodrigues is a solicitor it seems). We deserve to know.

    And then we must consider confirmation bias. If the error had been in the other direction, would a PB header be screaming about it? Er… we all know the answer to that question.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,589
    Two different things (at least) going on with this poll?

    1. Possibility of some issue with the poll weighting, as speculated/calculated by Wulfrun Phil. Will be interesting to see IF Redfield and Wilton respond, and if so, how?

    2. In addition, or substitution, is issue of actual decline in SNP support to the advantage of SLAB. Not inconceivable, to put it mildly, that Nicola Sturgeon's retirement (one way of looking at it, I guess) and ongoing SNP leadership contest have resulted in just this result: voters switching - at least for the moment, snapshot in time & all that - from Scottish Nationals to Scottish Labour.

    One factor that has aided SNP's electoral success, has clearly been the party's strong leadership under its Kingfish and then Queenfish, as contrasted with SLABs lack of same since the sad, premature demise of Donald Dewar. Right now this is up in the air. Hard to think this is NOT a factor?
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    rcs1000 said:

    Labour large majority a good bet if they do well in Scotland

    Labour could "double win" in Scotland: if they are on level pegging with the SNP at the General Election, one would expect them to benefit from anti-SNP tactical voting (as the LibDems in particular also do).

    Taking this R&W poll, and assuming it manifests itself as the SNP dropping 10% in 2024 in every constituency, with that 10% lumped onto whoever is in second place.

    You know what happens?

    SNPageddon.

    Of the 57 seats in Scotland, the SNP would win only 9 (!) The Labour Party ends up on 32, with the Conservatives managing 10 and LDs 6.

    Now, I suspect it won't be quite so severe. But even a situation where the SNP loses 5 points and the second placed party picks them up, then you still see the Labour Party gaining 15 or so seats.
    “Could”, “if”, “ taking this R&W poll”, “assuming”, juggling, squinting, fantasising, dreaming, hoping, then telling myself a few porkies… then… yes then, the Yoonyun is saved!! Hallelujah!

    Unionists really are a bit weird. Instead of working to make the Union less unpopular, they prefer to comfort themselves with entire fantasy worlds that only exist inside their own heads. Long may that continue!
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,409
    Is this our first all caps header?
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Is this our first all caps header?

    Indeed. PB goes priapic. ‘Tis not a pretty site.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,589
    edited March 2023

    Is this our first all caps header?

    Indeed. PB goes priapic. ‘Tis not a pretty site.
    Nice to see, that Swedes (and Scots) still do really have sex on the brain big-time.

    As former where well-known for, back in the salad (or smorgasbord) days of my sadly un-misspent youth . . .
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,409

    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!

    Another possibility is that Scottish politics is returning to normal, with voters looking at issues other than independence, which does not mean voters have changed their minds on independence.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!

    Another possibility is that Scottish politics is returning to normal, with voters looking at issues other than independence, which does not mean voters have changed their minds on independence.
    Widespread misunderstanding.

    This is from 10 months ago (YG)



    This from R&W:



    Scottish voters have always cared about big “normal” political issues. It is just that to improve the economy, housing, transport etc we need to govern our own country.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    Ahahahah
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    Listening to The Vietnam War: an Intimate History on audible at Danang Airport. Few better places to listen to it

    It’s the book version of that great Ken Burns documentary

    One detail has struck me: re the intensity of the US bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail (in terms of density more bombs were dropped on these jungle tracks than in any war before)

    Sometimes the US soldiers would come across an entire platoon of viet cong, all dead, in a jungle clearing, and apparently all unharmed. Except that the concussive power of the explosions had blasted the eyeballs out of all the Vietnamese heads

    That must be one of the most horrific battlefield images in human history. Just thought I’d share it with you over breakfast
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,409
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    The Lineker story has knocked Rishi's deal off the front pages. You might be out of touch with goings on back in dear old Blighty.


  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,003
    Leon said:

    Listening to The Vietnam War: an Intimate History on audible at Danang Airport. Few better places to listen to it

    It’s the book version of that great Ken Burns documentary

    One detail has struck me: re the intensity of the US bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail (in terms of density more bombs were dropped on these jungle tracks than in any war before)

    Sometimes the US soldiers would come across an entire platoon of viet cong, all dead, in a jungle clearing, and apparently all unharmed. Except that the concussive power of the explosions had blasted the eyeballs out of all the Vietnamese heads

    I've seen (in person and very close up) the remains of people killed by blast overpressure from a GBU-24 (2,000lb of precision guided high explosive freedom) and all had their eyes if little else so the VC eyes were probably eaten by the local wildlife or something.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,731
    edited March 2023
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    The Lineker story has knocked Rishi's deal off the front pages. You might be out of touch with goings on back in dear old Blighty.


    I’m not arguing that. I don’t think Lineker will nudge the polls in any direction - this is the media obsessing over the media, which it loves to do

    I’m saying this is the BBC’s highest paid star jeopardising the BBC’s role as impartial national broadcaster because he is a self adoring liberal twat who is addicted to the adulation of Twitter

    If - when - the BBC is perceived to be seriously biased in party politics it is finished. The license fee then becomes unsustainable. Lineker is too vain and foolish to see the damage he is doing
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    ping said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
    Adding ten million people to the population via migration probably hasn’t helped the Poo Problem. Tbh
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134
    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,003
    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    Nick Griffin and Gerry Adams, with the ghost of Madame Mao as the token foreigner/female
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Good morning, everyone.

    Can't help but feel the forecast of -9C feeling like -15C is wrong. I wasn't out for long but doesn't feel that bad at all.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,731
    edited March 2023
    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    The perfect person;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhlx43rTs2Q
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    Nick Griffin and Gerry Adams, with the ghost of Madame Mao as the token foreigner/female
    They should get Ryan Chelford back

    https://twitter.com/bbccomedy/status/914169651617288193
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    Is Xi Jinping that focused on the presenter position of BBC’s long running football highlights programme “Match of the Day?

    I guess it’s possible. Who can forget Nikita Kruschev’s anger at the UN when Barry Davies was chosen to commentate the Charity Shield

  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,289
    In fact didn’t we nearly go to war with North Korea when Bamber Gascoigne was forced to step down from University Challenge?
  • Options
    state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,421
    Love the all capitals header!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Leon, worth remembering a notable North Korean lady newsreader was brought back from retirement, I think when Kim Jong Un assumed power, to help strengthen the nascent regime.
  • Options
    MoTD will surely be better with no pundits. More football in the time available, what's not to like?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,003
    Penddu2 said:

    Popcorn Scenario: Bojo is suspended from HoC and a Recall election is forced in Uxbridge. Lineker stands against him with Labour and LD endorsement. PB servers collapse....

    If Labour have any sense they will sort something like this out (at deniable arms length) for the next GE. Like the Teals in Australia; independents running in seats where Labour don't have a chance but can deny the tories a seat.
  • Options
    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    They can/will take the world feed/Premier League Productions commentary.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    Excellent work Wulfrun Phil. I’d be wary of reading too much into this poll. It’s possible the error is in what’s shown before the final output.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,390
    ping said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
    Rivers are actually a problem in England and Wales.

    We pump and drain far too much shit into them, for a first world country, and far too many of them are "private" and totally inaccessible to people.

    I'd say there's also a problem with lack of access for bathing/swimming, which I'd love. But the problem with that is that if you get too many feral chavs and their dogs going there that's just as bad and will introduce all sorts of nasty chemical and bodily pollution back into the rivers, as well as tonnes of litter.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,390
    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,684
    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Listening to The Vietnam War: an Intimate History on audible at Danang Airport. Few better places to listen to it

    It’s the book version of that great Ken Burns documentary

    One detail has struck me: re the intensity of the US bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail (in terms of density more bombs were dropped on these jungle tracks than in any war before)

    Sometimes the US soldiers would come across an entire platoon of viet cong, all dead, in a jungle clearing, and apparently all unharmed. Except that the concussive power of the explosions had blasted the eyeballs out of all the Vietnamese heads

    I've seen (in person and very close up) the remains of people killed by blast overpressure from a GBU-24 (2,000lb of precision guided high explosive freedom) and all had their eyes if little else so the VC eyes were probably eaten by the local wildlife or something.
    Yes, pressure waves destroy internal organs, but I cannot see a reason why eyes should pop out. I suspect a tall tale that became myth.

  • Options
    Anyone who thought Rishi's deal with Macron yesterday would be a net vote winner are in for a shock.

    Britain is upping the amount of cash it pays France to deter migrants from crossing the Channel - but Britons are split on the principle of paying France to prevent small boat crossings

    All Britons: 39% support / 42% oppose

    Con voters: 43% / 48%


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1634206196126081031
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    Anyone who thought Rishi's deal with Macron yesterday would be a net vote winner are in for a shock.

    Britain is upping the amount of cash it pays France to deter migrants from crossing the Channel - but Britons are split on the principle of paying France to prevent small boat crossings

    All Britons: 39% support / 42% oppose

    Con voters: 43% / 48%


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1634206196126081031

    Classic Trumpist thinking from some voters: we're going to build a wall (of gendarmes) and the French are going to pay for it. Typically people like and expect all kinds of shit, but they expect anybody but themselves to shoulder the bill.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134
    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    Is Xi Jinping that focused on the presenter position of BBC’s long running football highlights programme “Match of the Day?
    Don't strain yourself. You've still got a whole day ahead of you to ensure you retain the "Most Ridiculous" title.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,359

    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!

    Get used to it. The SNP are spent. 8 yrs of Nicola Surgeon is enough to drive anyone to vote anything but SNP.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    Is Xi Jinping that focused on the presenter position of BBC’s long running football highlights programme “Match of the Day?

    I guess it’s possible. Who can forget Nikita Kruschev’s anger at the UN when Barry Davies was chosen to commentate the Charity Shield

    Don't know about Xi, but as we know, the Russian troll farms take an interest in our politics that's obsessive to the point of being inexplicable.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!

    This kind of finding only make you wonder why independence hasn't come one inch closer to happening in the entire period since 2014.

    Perhaps independence is to a substantial fraction of the Scottish electorate as chastity was to St Augustine...?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,035
    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Find a bloke in a pub? Play patriotic music?

    How they will be loving this in Moscow and Beijing.

    Is Xi Jinping that focused on the presenter position of BBC’s long running football highlights programme “Match of the Day?
    Don't strain yourself. You've still got a whole day ahead of you to ensure you retain the "Most Ridiculous" title.
    The "Most Ridiculous" title goes to the MOTD commentators and 'pundits'.

    Get rid of them and save the money. ;)
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    As an example of confirmation bias, an organisation that definitively does have the required mathematical and statistical skills, and an extremely robust, tried and tested methodology is the gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey. It shows that Scottish independence became the choice of the plurality a long time ago, and the choice of the majority recently:

    Independence 52%
    Devolution (the status quo) 38%
    Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%

    Now, ask yourself, did you see that finding published anywhere? No? You shock me!

    I wonder why?

    Actually, we all know why.

    And we all know why PB is publishing this particular piece of sterling investigative journalism. In the service of punters. Because this blog and this investigative journalist have no agenda. No siree!

    Get used to it. The SNP are spent. 8 yrs of Nicola Surgeon is enough to drive anyone to vote anything but SNP.
    They'll win the next GE in Scotland at a canter. Watch.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,359

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,193
    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    Another Tory cancel culture vulture.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    edited March 2023
    BBC apologises for failure to scrutinise Nadine Dorries’ claims about Sue Gray
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/10/bbc-apologises-failure-scrutinise-nadine-dorries-claims-sue-gray

    While explaining that this is how 'challenge' should work:
    ...The presenter (Bruce, on Question Time) had interrupted while a panel member was describing the father of Boris Johnson as a “wife-beater”, explaining that his friends had stated he attacked his wife but it was “a one-off”...
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,193

    Anyone who thought Rishi's deal with Macron yesterday would be a net vote winner are in for a shock.

    Britain is upping the amount of cash it pays France to deter migrants from crossing the Channel - but Britons are split on the principle of paying France to prevent small boat crossings

    All Britons: 39% support / 42% oppose

    Con voters: 43% / 48%


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1634206196126081031

    We’ve been here before.it hasn’t worked. Why would more money work ?
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134
    You have to love the way this report from the BBC characterises the role of the BBC in the Lineker affair as "Sticking to its guns on impartiality", given the suggestion that its chairman is in the government's pocket and that the Corporation has caved in to government pressure (which is actually referred to later in the same report!):
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64922674

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287
    So Gary Lineker gets the sack and MOTD is to be just a highlights programme with no talking heads wasting time in it.

    Hmmm.

    Is there any chance we could find something left wing tweeted by John Virgo and Mark Nicholas as well?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    I think this is very likely true.
    I don't actually have that much of a problem with Hancock's messages being leaked - he's an idiot who set himself up. But it's only a very select sample being published by a newspaper with an agenda.

    Matt Hancock’s leaked messages being ‘used to rewrite history’, say civil servants
    Some advisers and civil servants speaking to the Guardian say an ‘anti-lockdown filter’ has been placed on events
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/11/matt-hancocks-leaked-messages-are-being-used-to-rewrite-history

    Nothing wrong with making an argument against lockdown - but distorting the facts to do so, not so much.

    Directly comparable to Musk's 'Twitter files' release to a selected journalist with an agenda.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    It’s the only thing the Conservative party, as an institution, really cares about. The only interest that binds them together. Everything else comes and goes with different leaders, electoral strategies or ideological trends.

    The only thing they really stand for, when all is said and done, is the conservation of wealth.

    Spot on.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2023
    Should I present Match of the Day ?

    Perhaps Leon and Kinabalu can, as a sort of left-right double act, chummily patching up their differences as they mull over the football.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    edited March 2023
    Taz said:

    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ

    That's the BBC press office.
    Rather too much of MRD about it to be worthy of your multiple exclamation marks.

    It's not as though they were going to say that they dropped it fir fear if offending the government if that really were the case.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,122
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
    Adding ten million people to the population via migration probably hasn’t helped the Poo Problem. Tbh
    Horrible foreign poo. Not like our lovely British poo - which doesn't even smell!
    (your reminder that the problem with the sewers isn't the amount of poo but the fact they also take rainwater run-off, and don't have enough capacity for the latter).
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,359
    Jonathan said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    Another Tory cancel culture vulture.
    Bullshit.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    Football.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Anyone who thought Rishi's deal with Macron yesterday would be a net vote winner are in for a shock.

    Britain is upping the amount of cash it pays France to deter migrants from crossing the Channel - but Britons are split on the principle of paying France to prevent small boat crossings

    All Britons: 39% support / 42% oppose

    Con voters: 43% / 48%


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1634206196126081031

    Because the average voter doesn’t understand why we don’t simply send irregular migrants straight back to France.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2023
    Taz said:

    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ

    Although it ( that thread ) mentions that Countryfile quotes it as a six-part series, and the BBC insiders are quoted as agreeing. It could have been meant to be broadcast at a different time from the other episodes, but the part I find very difficult to believe is that it was commisioned exclusively for the BBC's iplayer. Attenborough is much too big a draw for that to be a typical or expected modus operandi.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Should I present Match of the Day ?

    Perhaps Leon and Kinabalu can, as a sort of left-right double act, chummily patching up their differences as they mull over the football.

    Leon would be pleading boredom by half time.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    ping said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
    The depressing thing is, you are probably right.

    One hates to think what the English countryside and coast is going to look like in two decades time. Cos one thing is rock solid certain: the Labour Party aren’t going to solve the problem either.

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-reverses-pledge-nationalise-energy-water-mail-general-election-2194125
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,723
    Taz said:

    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ

    Read it carefully. The press statement doesn't deny the accuracy of the story. Which probably means it's true!
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,003

    Should I present Match of the Day ?

    Perhaps Leon and Kinabalu can, as a sort of left-right double act, chummily patching up their differences as they mull over the football.

    CasinoRonniePickering and CHB3 pick the bones out of Everton v Brentford. Sublime television.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    FF43 said:

    Taz said:

    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ

    Read it carefully. The press statement doesn't deny the accuracy of the story. Which probably means it's true!
    I'm more interested in 'Wilson Isles'.
    A documentary about 1960s politics - or the Channel Islands ?
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Dura_Ace said:

    Should I present Match of the Day ?

    Perhaps Leon and Kinabalu can, as a sort of left-right double act, chummily patching up their differences as they mull over the football.

    CasinoRonniePickering and CHB3 pick the bones out of Everton v Brentford. Sublime television.
    Dorries and Mogg dream team.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287

    ping said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Very ex-PBer, Tim, on Twitter;

    https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1634425658104225792

    “Given the Conservatives has wrecked the NHS, the BBC and filled the nations water with shit, it does beg the question, what were they trying to conserve?”

    The answer seems obvious to me;

    Wealth.

    The only person wrecking the BBC is Gary “look at me and my tax avoiding saintliness” Lineker

    The NHS was mediocre anyway and was fucked even more by lockdowns which Labour wanted to go on LONGER than the Tories

    The shit in the rivers I cannot dispute
    Isn’t the reality with the shit in the rivers, that in order to not have shit in the rivers, requires replacing billions of miles of sewage pipes at an astronomical cost and decades of disruption?

    Like, is there the democratic will to double everyone’s water bill for the next twenty years to actually fix the problem?

    I suspect not.
    The depressing thing is, you are probably right.

    One hates to think what the English countryside and coast is going to look like in two decades time. Cos one thing is rock solid certain: the Labour Party aren’t going to solve the problem either.

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-reverses-pledge-nationalise-energy-water-mail-general-election-2194125
    for goodness sakes, this is just as much of a problem in Scotland. 47 of 89 beaches are contaminated with sewage above safe levels, at the last count.

    The SNP have no clue what to do either other than to bleat (falsely) that it’s a reserved matter so they can’t do anything.

    Unfortunately, it is because the solutions are possibly going to be even more unpopular than the problem.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,056
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    You mean you won’t miss his penetrating wit and insight?

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    You mean you won’t miss his penetrating wit and insight?

    I’ve missed every pundits’ penetrating wit and insight in every sport.

    With the honourable exception of Alan McManus whom I’ve always found very good, and the late Richie Benaud.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,684
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Taz said:

    So the guardian story about the BBC shortening the series of Wilson Isles by one episode for fear of,upsetting the Tories was bollocks !!

    As I said at the time.

    https://twitter.com/bbcpress/status/1634245237378785280?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ

    Read it carefully. The press statement doesn't deny the accuracy of the story. Which probably means it's true!
    I'm more interested in 'Wilson Isles'.
    A documentary about 1960s politics - or the Channel Islands ?
    Don't be Scilly!
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    Right wingers, why stop there, just go full Trump, cancel any independent voices, question the results, follow the dear leader and storm the Capitol.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,122
    Dura_Ace said:

    Should I present Match of the Day ?

    Perhaps Leon and Kinabalu can, as a sort of left-right double act, chummily patching up their differences as they mull over the football.

    CasinoRonniePickering and CHB3 pick the bones out of Everton v Brentford. Sublime television.
    I'd be happy to step up. I already provide the WhatsApp commentary for absent parents for my son's U14 games!
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287
    edited March 2023
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
    And now, having heard from the pundits, let's hear from the punned it.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Penddu2 said:

    Popcorn Scenario: Bojo is suspended from HoC and a Recall election is forced in Uxbridge. Lineker stands against him with Labour and LD endorsement. PB servers collapse....

    Get the popcorn in now… before there is a drought… or something… in Popcornland.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Doethur, to be fair, Murray Walker was very good. Commentator rather than pundit, of course.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited March 2023
    I remember a 90s play ; "an evening with Gary Lineker".

    Who would have thought our humble striker would become such a political star.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Mr. Doethur, to be fair, Murray Walker was very good. Commentator rather than pundit, of course.

    Posted on an F1 forum: “ Can anyone persuade David Croft to Tweet something very political and left-wing?”
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
    And now, having heard from the pundits, let's hear from the punned it.
    Just make sure that your puns are cleared in advance by CCHQ, else you’ll be sent off to Rwanda or another safe place.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
    And now, having heard from the pundits, let's hear from the punned it.
    Just make sure that your puns are cleared in advance by CCHQ, else you’ll be sent off to Rwanda or another safe place.
    I already live in Cannock.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Really good article which explains the SVB failure, for those interested.

    https://www.netinterest.co/p/the-demise-of-silicon-valley-bank
    ...Driven by the boom in venture capital funding, many of Silicon Valley’s customers became flush with cash over 2020 and 2021. Between the end of 2019 and the first quarter of 2022, the bank’s deposit balances more than tripled to $198 billion (including a small acquisition of Boston Private Financial Holdings). This compares with industry deposit growth of “only” 37% over the period. Around two-thirds of the deposits were non-interest-bearing demand deposits and the rest offered a small rate of interest. All-in, at the end of 2022, the cost of Silicon Valley’s deposits was 1.17% (up from 0.04% at the end of 2021).

    The bank invested the bulk of these deposits in securities. It adopted a two-pronged strategy: to shelter some of its liquidity in shorter duration available-for-sale securities, while reaching for yield with a longer duration held-to-maturity book. On a cost basis, the shorter duration AFS book grew from $13.9 billion at the end of 2019 to $27.3 billion at its peak in the first quarter of 2022; the longer duration HTM book grew by much more: from $13.8 billion to $98.7 billion. Part of the increase reflects a transfer of $8.8 billion of securities from AFS to HTM, but most reflected market purchases...


    Note Trump's abolition of the requirement for bank 'stress tests' probably didn't help.
  • Options
    stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,779
    ydoethur said:

    So Gary Lineker gets the sack and MOTD is to be just a highlights programme with no talking heads wasting time in it.

    Hmmm.

    Is there any chance we could find something left wing tweeted by John Virgo and Mark Nicholas as well?

    While PB's Truth and Scrutiny Committee searches for evidence, could you I request widening the search to include the previous utterances of Johns, Parrott and Inverdale.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,684
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
    And now, having heard from the pundits, let's hear from the punned it.
    Just make sure that your puns are cleared in advance by CCHQ, else you’ll be sent off to Rwanda or another safe place.
    Only pro government puns will be permitted, with the slight complicating factor of not knowing who will be in government in the morning.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287

    Mr. Doethur, to be fair, Murray Walker was very good. Commentator rather than pundit, of course.

    If we're including commentators, I actually preferred James Allen for F1 although he wasn't great as a trackside talking head. But the granddaddy of them all was Peter O'Sullevan, and he never did punditry so far as I know.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Love the all capitals header!

    Few things excite the PB juices more than an SNPBAD story. Astute punters ignore the guff. The only way to use polls is by assiduous long-term observation of polling trends by the same pollster, thus minimising* ‘house’ effects.

    (*they do occasionally change methodology of course, so not always valid)
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,684
    Nigelb said:

    Really good article which explains the SVB failure, for those interested.

    https://www.netinterest.co/p/the-demise-of-silicon-valley-bank
    ...Driven by the boom in venture capital funding, many of Silicon Valley’s customers became flush with cash over 2020 and 2021. Between the end of 2019 and the first quarter of 2022, the bank’s deposit balances more than tripled to $198 billion (including a small acquisition of Boston Private Financial Holdings). This compares with industry deposit growth of “only” 37% over the period. Around two-thirds of the deposits were non-interest-bearing demand deposits and the rest offered a small rate of interest. All-in, at the end of 2022, the cost of Silicon Valley’s deposits was 1.17% (up from 0.04% at the end of 2021).

    The bank invested the bulk of these deposits in securities. It adopted a two-pronged strategy: to shelter some of its liquidity in shorter duration available-for-sale securities, while reaching for yield with a longer duration held-to-maturity book. On a cost basis, the shorter duration AFS book grew from $13.9 billion at the end of 2019 to $27.3 billion at its peak in the first quarter of 2022; the longer duration HTM book grew by much more: from $13.8 billion to $98.7 billion. Part of the increase reflects a transfer of $8.8 billion of securities from AFS to HTM, but most reflected market purchases...


    Note Trump's abolition of the requirement for bank 'stress tests' probably didn't help.

    Interesting. Like in the Sub Prime crisis, the important thing to know is who else has done the same?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Doethur, Allen was hamstrung by ITV trying to force him into a Murray Walker-mould of excitement rather than being himself.

    Mr. Sandpit, many commentators seem to forget people are there for sport rather than their witty presence.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Chris said:

    If there aren't any commentators willing to work on Match of the Day, what will the BBC do?

    Get on the blower to Keysie and Greyio. They'll do it and won't give a fuck.
    There are plenty of people out there who neither like nor agree with Lineker, and some of them are even footballers.

    It shouldn't be that hard. The issue is the timescale.
    Perversely...MOTD may well prove much more popular without the punditry. It would be very funny if this proved to be the case.
    More time watching football, less time watching others talking about football. What’s not to like?
    It would be like Election Night programmes without the politicians, just the results.
    Fantastic. More time checking your bets, and less time watching the inane drivel that goes for election night programming.
    We should do a PB election night livestream. Hosted by Mr Eagles in his loudest shoes, analysis from RCS, Hyufd and Nick Palmer, puns by me and comic relief from - well, pick anyone.
    “This is just a bit of pun”
    And now, having heard from the pundits, let's hear from the punned it.
    Just make sure that your puns are cleared in advance by CCHQ, else you’ll be sent off to Rwanda or another safe place.
    Only pro government puns will be permitted, with the slight complicating factor of not knowing who will be in government in the morning.
    Are punning against East Asia or Eurasia? Do you want a vision of the future? It’s a pun stamping on a human face, for ever.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Dura_Ace said:

    Penddu2 said:

    Popcorn Scenario: Bojo is suspended from HoC and a Recall election is forced in Uxbridge. Lineker stands against him with Labour and LD endorsement. PB servers collapse....

    If Labour have any sense they will sort something like this out (at deniable arms length) for the next GE. Like the Teals in Australia; independents running in seats where Labour don't have a chance but can deny the tories a seat.
    Here’s a list of six Conservative seats where I can guarantee you that the opposite will happen: Labour will bust their guts trying to get their supporters to vote Tory. They have form.

    Aberdeenshire Central
    Aberdeenshire North and Moray East
    Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine
    Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk
    Dumfries and Galloway
    Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    tlg86 said:

    Excellent work Wulfrun Phil. I’d be wary of reading too much into this poll. It’s possible the error is in what’s shown before the final output.

    If this “error” (we await R&W response) is explained, will Wulfrun and PB will devote A NEW THREAD to the apology?

    Ho ho.

    Punters beware.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Really good article which explains the SVB failure, for those interested.

    https://www.netinterest.co/p/the-demise-of-silicon-valley-bank
    ...Driven by the boom in venture capital funding, many of Silicon Valley’s customers became flush with cash over 2020 and 2021. Between the end of 2019 and the first quarter of 2022, the bank’s deposit balances more than tripled to $198 billion (including a small acquisition of Boston Private Financial Holdings). This compares with industry deposit growth of “only” 37% over the period. Around two-thirds of the deposits were non-interest-bearing demand deposits and the rest offered a small rate of interest. All-in, at the end of 2022, the cost of Silicon Valley’s deposits was 1.17% (up from 0.04% at the end of 2021).

    The bank invested the bulk of these deposits in securities. It adopted a two-pronged strategy: to shelter some of its liquidity in shorter duration available-for-sale securities, while reaching for yield with a longer duration held-to-maturity book. On a cost basis, the shorter duration AFS book grew from $13.9 billion at the end of 2019 to $27.3 billion at its peak in the first quarter of 2022; the longer duration HTM book grew by much more: from $13.8 billion to $98.7 billion. Part of the increase reflects a transfer of $8.8 billion of securities from AFS to HTM, but most reflected market purchases...


    Note Trump's abolition of the requirement for bank 'stress tests' probably didn't help.

    Interesting. Like in the Sub Prime crisis, the important thing to know is who else has done the same?
    To some extent, everyone.
    But SVB is exceptional in the extraordinary growth in its assets, and particularly those declared 'Held to Maturity'. The potential shortfall in value, if that designation came under challenge, doesn't seem to have been considered.
    It's just a wrinkle in the usual problem of borrowing short term (via deposits) and lending longer term (by bond purchases which are locked in by the HTM designation).

    Even then, it might not have failed, had it better handled its attempt at fundraising to shore up the balance sheet. That was what destroyed confidence and started the run.
This discussion has been closed.